Cargando…

Comparison between clinical and audiological results of tympanoplasty with modified sandwich technique and underlay technique()

INTRODUCTION: Surgical repair of the tympanic membrane, termed a type one tympanoplasty is a tried and tested treatment modality. Overlay or underlay technique of tympanoplasty is common. Sandwich tympanoplasty is the combined overlay and underlay grafting of tympanic membrane. OBJECTIVE: To describ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nemade, Sanjana Vijay, Shinde, Kiran Jaywant, Naik, Chetana Shivadas, Qadri, Haris
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9449232/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28476655
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjorl.2017.03.009
_version_ 1784784248790581248
author Nemade, Sanjana Vijay
Shinde, Kiran Jaywant
Naik, Chetana Shivadas
Qadri, Haris
author_facet Nemade, Sanjana Vijay
Shinde, Kiran Jaywant
Naik, Chetana Shivadas
Qadri, Haris
author_sort Nemade, Sanjana Vijay
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Surgical repair of the tympanic membrane, termed a type one tympanoplasty is a tried and tested treatment modality. Overlay or underlay technique of tympanoplasty is common. Sandwich tympanoplasty is the combined overlay and underlay grafting of tympanic membrane. OBJECTIVE: To describe and evaluate the modified sandwich graft (mediolateral graft) tympanoplasty using temporalis fascia and areolar fascia. To compare the clinical and audiological outcome of modified sandwich tympanoplasty with underlay tympanoplasty. METHODS: A total of 88 patients of chronic otitis media were studied. 48 patients (Group A) underwent type one tympanoplasty with modified sandwich graft. Temporalis fascia was underlaid and the areolar fascia was overlaid. 48 patients (Group B) underwent type one tympanoplasty with underlay technique. We assessed the healing and hearing results. RESULTS: Successful graft take up was accomplished in 47 patients (97.9%) in Group A and in 40 patients (83.3%) Group B. The average Air-Bone gap closure achieved in Group A was 24.4 ± 1.7 dB while in Group B; it was 22.5 ± 3.5 dB. Statistically significant difference was found in graft healing rate. Difference in hearing improvement was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Double layered graft with drum-malleus as a ‘meat’ of sandwich maintains a perfect balance between sufficient stability and adequate acoustic sensitivity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9449232
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94492322022-09-09 Comparison between clinical and audiological results of tympanoplasty with modified sandwich technique and underlay technique() Nemade, Sanjana Vijay Shinde, Kiran Jaywant Naik, Chetana Shivadas Qadri, Haris Braz J Otorhinolaryngol Original Article INTRODUCTION: Surgical repair of the tympanic membrane, termed a type one tympanoplasty is a tried and tested treatment modality. Overlay or underlay technique of tympanoplasty is common. Sandwich tympanoplasty is the combined overlay and underlay grafting of tympanic membrane. OBJECTIVE: To describe and evaluate the modified sandwich graft (mediolateral graft) tympanoplasty using temporalis fascia and areolar fascia. To compare the clinical and audiological outcome of modified sandwich tympanoplasty with underlay tympanoplasty. METHODS: A total of 88 patients of chronic otitis media were studied. 48 patients (Group A) underwent type one tympanoplasty with modified sandwich graft. Temporalis fascia was underlaid and the areolar fascia was overlaid. 48 patients (Group B) underwent type one tympanoplasty with underlay technique. We assessed the healing and hearing results. RESULTS: Successful graft take up was accomplished in 47 patients (97.9%) in Group A and in 40 patients (83.3%) Group B. The average Air-Bone gap closure achieved in Group A was 24.4 ± 1.7 dB while in Group B; it was 22.5 ± 3.5 dB. Statistically significant difference was found in graft healing rate. Difference in hearing improvement was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Double layered graft with drum-malleus as a ‘meat’ of sandwich maintains a perfect balance between sufficient stability and adequate acoustic sensitivity. Elsevier 2017-04-21 /pmc/articles/PMC9449232/ /pubmed/28476655 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjorl.2017.03.009 Text en © 2017 Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial. Published by Elsevier Editora Ltda. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Nemade, Sanjana Vijay
Shinde, Kiran Jaywant
Naik, Chetana Shivadas
Qadri, Haris
Comparison between clinical and audiological results of tympanoplasty with modified sandwich technique and underlay technique()
title Comparison between clinical and audiological results of tympanoplasty with modified sandwich technique and underlay technique()
title_full Comparison between clinical and audiological results of tympanoplasty with modified sandwich technique and underlay technique()
title_fullStr Comparison between clinical and audiological results of tympanoplasty with modified sandwich technique and underlay technique()
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between clinical and audiological results of tympanoplasty with modified sandwich technique and underlay technique()
title_short Comparison between clinical and audiological results of tympanoplasty with modified sandwich technique and underlay technique()
title_sort comparison between clinical and audiological results of tympanoplasty with modified sandwich technique and underlay technique()
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9449232/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28476655
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjorl.2017.03.009
work_keys_str_mv AT nemadesanjanavijay comparisonbetweenclinicalandaudiologicalresultsoftympanoplastywithmodifiedsandwichtechniqueandunderlaytechnique
AT shindekiranjaywant comparisonbetweenclinicalandaudiologicalresultsoftympanoplastywithmodifiedsandwichtechniqueandunderlaytechnique
AT naikchetanashivadas comparisonbetweenclinicalandaudiologicalresultsoftympanoplastywithmodifiedsandwichtechniqueandunderlaytechnique
AT qadriharis comparisonbetweenclinicalandaudiologicalresultsoftympanoplastywithmodifiedsandwichtechniqueandunderlaytechnique